(c) 1995 Copyright The News and Observer Publishing Co.
(c) 1995 Bloomberg
WASHINGTON (Oct 10, 1995 - 10:54 EDT) -- A rose may be a rose by any
other name, but when bingo goes digital, is it still bingo?
The answer, in California at least, appears to be no.
The Supreme Court today refused to second-guess a lower court ruling
that computerized video bingo games are legally akin to slot machines,
which are prohibited under California law.
A small Native American tribe, which operates a successful gambling
operation on tribal land in San Diego County, argued that the law
should treat computer bingo no differently than bingo games sold on
sheets of paper, which are legal in California.
The dispute involves a game called pull-tab bingo. Traditionally,
gamblers bought a sheet of paper divided into a grid, with a number or
symbol in each square. Some squares were covered with tabs, which were
pulled off to reveal whether the player wins a prize.
The Sycuan Band of Mission Indians installed a video version of
pull-tab at its casino, only to have its facility raided by San Diego
County authorities.
The raid set up a complicated legal battle that involved competing
interpretations of state and federal law, and the sovereignty of Native
American tribal groups.
The tribe argued that pull-tab and other types of bingo are classified
among a group of games allowed on tribal lands by a federal law that
regulates gambling. California authorities said the video version is
more like a slot machine, which is among casino-type games that federal
law permits only when allowed by broader state laws or a state-tribal
compact. In this case, California law bars casino gambling, and the
Sycuan band has no compact with the state to allow slot machines.
In a fight before a San Francisco-based federal appeals court, both
sides came away unhappy.
The appeals court agreed with the state's argument that video pull-tab
is a casino-type game. But the court sided with the tribe's argument
that only federal law enforcement agents, and not county officers, have
authority to enforce gambling laws against Indian tribes.
Both sides appealed to the Supreme Court, which today refused to
consider either argument.
The case is Sycuan Band of Mission Indians v. Miller, 94-2064.